Commit Graph
3 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
Marius CiepluchandClaude Opus 5 0fcd5feade feat(model): a region for the code that is in no function
contributor-scan 2.5. VAmPI's `host='0.0.0.0'` is now reported exactly
once, at app.py:17:<module>. Before task 2.2 it was reported eight times
in eight files that do not contain it; after 2.2 it was reported nowhere.

Two causes, one shape: nothing could ask about module-level code.

**The main-guard marker is not a function.** `__main__` is what the mapper
emits for `if __name__ == '__main__':`. Sent to the engine as a function
name it matched nothing, because a CPG calls a file's top-level code
`<module>` -- verified against the VAmPI CPG rather than assumed. The
region model translates the marker, which is the one place that turns what
the mapper meant into what the scanner asks.

**A function-scoped file had no region for its module body.** Settings,
route registration and globals live in no function, and every region's
query filters by function name. A file-level region beside the handlers
would report each handler's findings a second time, which is why the
earlier rule dropped it as "a second full-file pass". A module-scope region
PARTITIONS the file instead of overlapping it. That only became cheap after
batching: before it, a region was a JVM.

Two things this needed to be correct rather than merely present:

- A module method spans its whole file, so the taint query's line-range
  containment made `<module>` the parent of every function in it. Under
  module scope, membership is direct -- otherwise the module region reports
  every handler's sinks again, which is the duplication the old rule was
  avoiding.
- A module body is not a handler. The marker-derived region inherited the
  handler families and entailed a missing authorization check on the main
  guard: a finding with no possible remediation. Caught by the first
  repository run that had the region, and now covered by a test.

  bind address   8 wrong files -> 0 -> 1, at app.py:17:<module>
  regions        22 -> 25
  entailed       8 -> 9
  query time     37.4s -> 41.3s
  peak RSS       827MB -> 823MB
  cost           $0.0067 -> $0.0068

Three more regions for four seconds and no more model calls: the budget is
a total and was already spent, so regions_unasked rose 17 -> 20 -- those
regions got the free pass and are reported as unasked, not as clean.

`<module>` is Joern's Python name for a module body; JavaScript uses
`:program`, so this is verified for Python only.

Gates byte-identical.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01T7XD7x5KonMdmGRkp63EQG
2026-09-09 09:43:53 +02:00
Marius CiepluchandClaude Opus 5 c35426e186 perf(model): one Joern invocation per query kind, not one per region
JVM startup dominated a scan: a call per region per family put a ten-line
file at 275s over three regions, and would have put a thousand regions at
roughly fifty hours. The queries themselves are milliseconds once the CPG
is loaded, so the cost was almost entirely process starts.

scan_repository() is now collect -> batch -> arbitrate. The three .sc
scripts accept a `requests` JSON map and answer all of them in one run,
keeping the single-request form so the committed measurements stay
reproducible byte-for-byte. Arbiters are untouched: each is handed a
CpgResult whose `run` returns its own prefetched rows.

The batcher builds parameters by calling request_params() extracted from
taint.py, dominance.py and config_value.py rather than reconstructing
them. A second copy that drifts from the arbiter's is the exact shape of
the five family-assumption bugs the predecessor spec spent a session
finding; there is now one definition per family and the batcher borrows
it.

Regions are also deduplicated by (path, function), collapsing the
nameless entry-point rows that were producing `model:injection:?:10`.

Measured on the same ten-line file: 275s -> 106s, three duplicate
findings -> one `model:injection:ping:10`, rung unchanged at
model_entailed. Gates byte-identical.

Server mode is recorded as task 2.3, deliberately sequenced after the
repository measurement: whether the remaining ~100s floor is worth a
process model, a weakened subprocess seam and a Scala-evaluating HTTP
endpoint depends on a build-time-to-query-time ratio only 2.2 produces.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01T7XD7x5KonMdmGRkp63EQG
2026-09-09 07:57:35 +02:00
Marius CiepluchandClaude Opus 5 8663c1a5b3 feat(contributor-scan): 1.1 regions from entry points, 1.2 the repository driver
Pair scoring could rely on a labelled function; a contributor cannot supply one
-- which code is risky is the question they are asking. Regions now come from
entry points, with a file-level fallback that says it is one, and each carries
only the families its shape and language admit. Ranking uses what
EntryPointRecord already decided (access_level, trust_boundary) rather than a
second opinion computed from the same evidence.

A family is offered only where its arbiter could answer: access_control needs a
handler, so a library file with no entry point is not asked about obligations it
has no siblings to be inconsistent with.

The driver makes the two costs that were free at pair scale explicit. ONE CPG
per repository, reused across regions -- a build is 5-30s on a forty-line
excerpt and per-region builds would make this unusable. And a budget that is a
TOTAL for the run rather than the enumerator's per-region cap of eight, spent
highest-rank-first, with whatever it does not reach counted into
regions_unjudged. A tool that silently analyses a tenth of a repository and
reports a clean result is worse than one that says what it skipped.

Two flaws the tests caught, both mine and both about ownership: the budget
counted calls by reading a client's own usage log, so it silently never tripped
for a client that keeps none -- the driver now counts its own spend through a
wrapper; and the driver trusted its caller to have sorted, when the order the
budget is spent in belongs to whoever holds the budget.

The third was worse and only surfaced because a test failed for the right
reason: the driver passed candidates=() and never enumerated, so a repository
scan would have reported only what the arbiters establish unaided and never
populated the suspicion band -- which supplied 15 of 26 findings in the pair
measurement. It enumerates now.

Sibling audit (Req 8.5) done before writing: family routing lives in exactly one
production place, pipeline._arbitrate, dispatching on spec type. regions_for
returns family names and the driver resolves specs, so that stays true.

750 passing, mypy clean over 96 files, gates byte-identical, zero orphans.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01T7XD7x5KonMdmGRkp63EQG
2026-09-09 07:28:30 +02:00